Amendments in pleadings under Order 6, Rule 17 CPC should be allowed to serve the ends of justice unless they change the nature of the suit or unreasonably prejudice the other party.

ORDER :

Shailendra Singh, J.

Re : I.A. Nos. 3292 of 2018 & 3293 of 2018

Both the interlocutory applications were filed by the original appellant(plaintiff), namely, Ajit Kumar Singh, who died on 21.07.2020 and his legal heirs have already been substituted in the memo of appeal vide order No. 24 dated 18.07.2022. The interlocutory applications Nos. 3292 of 2018 and 3293 of 2018 are hereinafter referred to as ‘I.A. No. 3292’ and ‘I.A. No. 3293’ respectively.

2. I.A. No. 3292 has been filed under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short ‘C.P.C.’) with a prayer to permit the appellant to make an amendment in the plaint by adding a new paragraph No. 22 ¼d½ which is as follows :-

^^22¼d½& ;g fd izeksn dqekj us tks nks cSukek fnukad 13-10-1999 cuke eqnyg ua0 1 rFkk 2 dks rgjhj oks rdehu fd;k gS vkSj vius dks iq= Lo0 gfjgj izlkn lkfdu ekStk& vYyhiqj] ftyk&xks.Mk ¼;w0ih0½ dk fn[kk;k x;k gS] og fcydqy xyr oks cukoVh gSA gjfxt izeksn dqekj gfjgj izlkn ds iq= ugha FksA eqnkyg ua0 1 oks 2 us tkyh cSukeksa dks rS;kj djkus ds fy, ,d vtuch l[lykg dks [kM+k djk ds cSukeksa dk rgjhj ,oe~ rdehy djk fy;k gS ftldh dksbZ ikoanh eueqnbZ ij ugh gSA**

3. Mr. J.K. Verma, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the relevant facts leading to these interlocutory applications are that one late Ramprit Ram got 1 Bigha land, out of 5 Bighas 10 Katha of land in his share in partition of joint family property, of which details have been given in the plaint. The said Ramprit Ram sold his one Bigha land to his uncle late Surat Ram and one relative of his uncle, namely, Jai Ram Mahto on 12.08.1926. Later on, both the persons sold 10 kathha land out of the said land to one Padarath Ram on 08.04.1936 but since the consideration amount was not paid, so, that sale deed became null and void. Later, Jai Ram Mahto and one Vishwanath, son of late Surat Ram, sold the said 1 Bigha land purchased from Ramprit Ram, along with other lands to one Awadh Bihari Prasad on 08.11.1944 and put him in possession over the said sold lands. Thereafter, one namely, Fateh Bahadur, who was a senior law practioner of Chapra purchased the said land from Awadh Bihari Prasad on 05.09.1945 in the name of his brother-in-law (sarhu) Jagarnath Prasad @ Tuntun Babu through benami sale and the said Jagarnath Prasad @ Tuntun Babu executed a registered Ladavi deed in the name of Fateh Bahadur claiming and showing himself as “NAME LENDER” on 08.08.1952 and later on, the said 1 bigha land was partitioned in the family of late Fateh Bahadur who had one more brother, namely, late Kapildeo Narayan and the plaintiff/original appellant and the substituted appellants are the descendants of late Kapildeo Narayan and finally, the plaintiff and his brother got 10 Katha land out of 1 Bigha through the partition suit No. 44 of 1969 and the said 10 katha land was again partitioned between the plaintiff and his own brother Anjanee Kumar Sinha and both got 5 Katha land each. Likewise, the descendants of Fateh Bahadur also got their share in the land partitioned. It is further submitted that the legal heirs of Fateh Bahadur and the brother of plaintiff sold their entire share in the said 1 Bigha land which originally belonged to late Ramprit Ram and all the purchasers came in possession over the sold land and constructed different houses upon it also. Th